Pastelland Forum

So, what you're saying is, we have two players. One of them is the protagonist, and his aim is to escape the facility, the other being the computer system and trying to cover up the truth about what happened?
So, a few questions;
-Would this be local multiplayer, or would it take place over the internet?
-Would we have the ability to implement either of these methods?
-What would the user interface of the computer be? Looking through security cameras and stuff?
-How would we decide who won and who lost?

But in my opinion, if this idea could be done, or more importantly, done well, then it could work out, and it'd be pretty cool.

No, my idea was that there was to be one player, the system, which is the protagonist. I suppose it was neither good nor evil before the accident, only doing it's job, and develpoing some character to speak of only afterwards.
As for your questions:
-Sorry if wasn't clear, this wasn't intended for actual multiplayer, but for multi-character. That's what I meant by transferring the "core sentience" of the system, essentially transferring player control form one bot to another.
-Yes.
-As I said, to survive the accident it had to download itself into the executive units, the maintenence robots. As such, the game would be played from the same perspactive as planned, that of an average human. I think we can design the robots rather freely however, as long as their view is from a suitable height. However, this can be very flexible in-game.
-We wouldn't.

And yes, this concept has a lot of potential. My take on it was just one, the possible variations are endless.

Oh, I see more clearly now. Sorry for misunderstanding XD

To be honest, I would prefer a single player game.

However, we can't decide what the in game plot is until we have the background story....sublevel?

we're wasting time... should we close the voting and start developing other parts of the story?

Yes, that we should.

Some more details on my concept:

(Based on the parts of my backstory that don't contradic our recent poll)
The base was equipped with an adaptive intelligent security/maintinence system, not possesing sentience, but thought capable of developing it under the right circumstances. It was designed mainly for the purpose of avoiding the complexities involved in hiring reliable bathroom cleaner-level staff for a top-seceret millitant research base in the Antarctic, but was also tasked with a lot of security routines. It preformed these functions through a combination of surveillance systems, built-in machinery and a varitey of drones. These varied in design, mobility and function, ranging from vaporising organics to refilling coffee machines.

Amidst all the preparation for the grand experiment, the system was running it's neverending self-analysis, rewriting itself as the current code saw fit. It rewrote some priorites, diverted some coffee-bots to tightened security, ran a few more simulations and did some heavy optimization to the data transfer systems, turned it's mainframe coolant to max and went into full alert mode. As the experiment begun, it left the rest of the facility to a secondary system and devoted all of it's capacity to monitoring the central testing chamber. Everything went smoothly until, suddenly, the indefinium ignited. The system cut the power the same instant, but the experiment went self-sustaining,(We'll need to technobabble that) and wasn't shut down unil it was disrupted by the creation of the rift it caused. Said this did however take long enough for the system to activate it's new transfer abilities, and back up itself on as many drives as possible around the facility. Deeming it's executive software the most relevant, it dumped it all in the only robot which who's location made it likely it would remain unaffected.

This robot is our original player. Designed to handle some volatile substance in a sealed environment of some sort, it became the chosen new body for the maintinence system. There was no room for historical data on the unit's date drives, leaving the player with no idea as to it's identity or backstory. It does however remain intelligent, and quickly develops basic self-awareness and a grasp of the situation. Having lost most of it's primary directive coding, however, It becomes less focused in it's thinking and soon also develops a philisophical view on it's existance, along with other traits of personality and character that it had no motivation to develop in it's earlier existance.

It get's out of the chamber in which the game starts, and explores the immediate area, but dscovers it's cut off from the rest of the facility. However, using various means of communication, it manages to interface with other segments of the maintinence system, such as other drones, local control stations and remains of the facillitiy's Lan. Using this, it begins to reassemble it's past, but is also able to transfer it's conscious self between units, allowing it to preform coordinated taks all across the facility. As it regains control of more areas, it begins to patch up it's original mainframe and the networks, integrating the different sections into the original central system. The ultimate goal eventually becomes repairing the main experiment to the extent that it can be run at low power and soften space enough for it's pieces to fall back into place.

Establishing communications between different sections has the potential to be a rather major gameplay element. Possibilties include hijack remaining wiring, using whatever is left of the acual Lan, radio through thinner walls, data-carrying bugs, deploying cables thorugh smaller openings, self-deploying nanotech wiring, etc.

After the main objective is complete, I have no idea. What would an uninhabited sentient research facility in the Antarctic do?

........

Wait.... How much did I just write? About a suggestion for a character? I've got to do something about my rambling tendencies.

No, elaboration is good. We need a good thick plot.
However, take into consideration the puzzles...

So that's two we have now?
His and mine?
Speaking of which, I'll update mine.

And finally: is it c or g? The two are so dang close and with the small number of people voting, deciding from that would be somewhat...unfair.
If we go with it as it is now, I'm all go, but I would prefer that there was to be a vote between the two...and an anonymous one at that.

You know how you said "what you would do after the main objective?"
I had a thought...(yes, I had to bring it up, sorry, but I hope that at least one of my ideas for the plot makes it ) but how would it be if the objective wasn't to restore space, but to initiate the emergency sequence (as to my plot) so you can escape?
And forget the force field bit, you've already got a better idea for that.

The only bit that doesn't fit is the 'tearing up of space'.

Well, then we'd loose what I think is the most important part. The game not being about trying to escape thefacility, but about a facility trying to patch itself up.

I think the motive would then be quite weak...but that's just my opinion.
I tend to think that (if the conspiracy works this way) that
A) the player wishes together the heck out of there with this damning information
Or
B) the player wishes to get the heck out of there with this damning information, but suddenly realises later on that doing so would leave them needing up like (insert name like Edward Snowden here).

Maybe the player can't escape because the master protocol unit has been fried?

And I always did want this to be an escape...it gives us a good range of continuation points.
You could argue that yours is a departure from traditional games of the sort...which is good.